2012 INSC 0747
                                    SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                                             State of Jharkhand

                                                      Vs.

                                           Ram Chandra Bhagat

                                             Cr.l.No.439of2006

                        (Anil.R.Dave and Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhyay,JJ.)

                                                  9.11.2012

                                                JUDGMENT

Anil. R. Dave,J.

1. Being aggrieved by an order dated 8th September, 2005 passed by the High Court of
Jharkhand at Ranchi in Criminal Revision No.788 of 2005, whereby the order of conviction
of the appellant was confirmed by the High Court, the appellant has filed this appeal. By
virtue of the impugned order, the appellant was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment
for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for a period of two months has been confirmed.

2. This appeal was initially heard by this court but after hearing the appeal, one of the learned
judges was of the view that the appellant could not have been convicted for committing an
offence under Section 493 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the IPC'), whereas the said
view was not accepted by another learned judge.

3. In the afore-stated circumstances, the appeal was placed before the Hon'ble Chief Justice,
who referred it to a three-judge Bench and, therefore, it had been placed before us.

4. As the facts have been duly discussed by both the learned judges in their respective orders,
we narrate the same in a nutshell. According to the case of the prosecution, the appellant had
acquaintance with the complainant and upon developing intimate relationship with her, by his
actions he made the complainant to believe that she had become the wife of the appellant
herein and thereby they had stayed together for nine years as husband and wife and during
that period the complainant had given birth to two children - a son and a daughter.
Thereafter, the allegation is that the appellant had turned the complainant out of his house.

1  SpotLaw
5. In the afore-stated circumstances, a complaint was filed by the complainant and in
pursuance of the said complaint the appellant was prosecuted. After a full-fledged trial, the
appellant was convicted by an order dated 20th December, 2003 passed in G.R. Case No.27
of 1992(Lohardaga P.S. case No.12/92) by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Lohardaga. An
appeal filed against the order of conviction, being Criminal Appeal No.1 of 2004, was
dismissed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Lohardage. Being aggrieved
by the order of dismissal of the appeal, the appellant had filed Criminal Revision
No.788/2005 before the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi and the same was rejected by an
order dated 8th September, 2005, which lead to the filing of this appeal.

6. We heard the learned counsel and also meticulously perused the impugned judgments and
the record pertaining to the case.

7. Before dealing with the case in hand, let us see as to how and why the learned judges of
this Court had come to different conclusions.

8. As we are concerned with the provisions of Section 493 of the I PC, it would be just and
proper to look at the said section before we deal with the subject. "Section 493: Cohabitation
caused by a man deceitfully inducing a belief of lawful marriage - Every man who by deceit
causes any woman who is not lawfully married to him to believe that she is lawfully married
to him and to cohabit or have sexual intercourse with him in that belief, shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall
also be liable to fine.

9. Upon perusal of Section 493 of the IPC, to establish that a person has committed an
offence under the said Section, it must be established that a person had deceitfully induced a
belief to a woman, who is not lawfully married to him, that she is a lawfully married wife of
that person and thereupon she should cohabit or should have had sexual intercourse with that
person. Looking at the afore-stated section, it is clear that the accused must induce a woman,
who is not lawfully married to him, to believe that he is married to her and as a result of the
afore-stated representation, the woman should believe that she was lawfully married to him
and there should be cohabitation or sexual intercourse as a result of the deception.

10. One of the learned judges was of the view that no deception was practised by the
appellant and, therefore, no offence under the provisions of Section 493 of the IPC had been
committed. It was the view of the learned judge that though the appellant had acted in an
immoral manner which might not be approved by the society but he had not committed any
offence in the eyes of law by staying with the complainant for about nine years. On the other
hand, on appreciation of the evidence, another learned judge had confirmed the concurrent
findings of the courts below and had come to the conclusion that the appellant had in fact
practised deception, which led the complainant woman to believe that she was a lawfully
married wife of the appellant though in reality she was not a lawfully married wife of the
appellant and thereupon she had cohabited with the appellant. In these circumstances, another
learned judge wanted to confirm the concurrent findings of the courts below.

2  SpotLaw
11. Upon perusal of the evidence, we also are of the view, like the courts below that the
appellant had practised deception and as a result thereof the complainant believed that she
was a lawfully married wife of the accused and thereafter there was cohabitation and sexual
intercourse as a result of the deception.

12. Upon perusal of the evidence we find that upon being acquainted with the complainant,
the accused had developed a close relationship with the complainant. He used to visit the
complainant from time to time and he had promised the complainant to marry her. Upon
perusal of the evidence, we further find that the accused-appellant had got a form, with
regard to marriage registration, signed by the complainant. The form was signed by the
accused-appellant and he also induced the complainant to sign the form so as to get married.
The form duly signed by both the persons had been exhibited and the signature of the
appellant had been identified. The afore-stated fact made the complainant to believe that the
accused-appellant had married her and, therefore, she had started residing with him as his
wife. In fact, the appellant did not marry the complainant. The persons related to the
complainant and the accused were also made to believe that the complainant was the wife of
the appellant, though rituals necessary for Hindu marriage had never been performed. It is an
admitted fact that no marriage had taken place between the complainant and the appellant but
only on the basis of the documents signed by the complainant at the instance of the
accused-appellant, the complainant was made to believe that she was a lawfully married wife
of the accused-appellant.

13. As a result of the afore-stated deceitful act of the accused-appellant, the complainant
started residing with him as she believed that she had lawfully married the accused-appellant.

14. There is sufficient evidence on record to show that the complainant had resided with the
accused-appellant and the afore-stated fact was also reflected in the voters' list. In the voters'
list the name of the complainant was shown as the wife of the appellant. As a result of the
cohabitation, the complainant had given birth to two children. The accused-appellant had
acknowledged the fact that the said two children were his children. Several ceremonies in
relation to the birth of the children had also been performed by the accused-appellant.

15. Thus, upon perusal of the evidence, we find that there was sufficient evidence to the
effect that the accused-appellant has deceived the complainant, which ultimately resulted into
a belief in the mind of the complainant that she was a lawfully married wife of the
accused-appellant, though she was not.

16. The afore-stated evidence which has been found by all the courts below is sufficient to
show that the complainant was made to believe by the deceitful act of the accused-appellant
that she was lawfully married to the accused-appellant. The complainant had also cohabited
with the appellant and had sexual intercourse with the accused-appellant and thereby she had
given birth to two children also.

3  SpotLaw
17. In the afore-stated set of circumstances, when there is ample evidence to the effect that
only on the deceitful representation of the accused-appellant the complainant believed herself
to be a lawfully married wife of the accused-appellant and as she had cohabited with the
accused-appellant, there cannot be any doubt with regard to commission of an offence under
the provisions of Section 493 of the IPC. Moreover, we do not find any error committed by
the courts below in coming to the final conclusion with regard to commission of the offence
by the appellant and, therefore, we confirm the order passed by the High Court.

18. In these circumstances, we dismiss the appeal. The bail bonds shall stand cancelled and
the accused-appellant is directed to surrender to undergo the remaining period of sentence
with immediate effect.

4  SpotLaw